#EmissionsAnalytics

Anyone who’s laid a substantial amount of rubber in a local parking lot will tell you that the scent emitted doesn’t smell particularly healthy for the environment (burnt clutch smell is even less appealing — don’t ask how I know). And while the typical driver doesn’t burn through tires via successive smoke shows, regular road use effectively does the same thing over a much longer timeline — and a new study claims it’s up to 1,000 times worse than what actually comes out of a vehicle’s exhaust system.

The report, penned by UK-based independent research firm Emissions Analytics, has circulated within the media for a few days and claims that pollution stemming from tire and brake wear is a growing problem. With European lawmakers clamping down on tailpipe emissions, the firm suggests “non-exhaust emissions” will be the next big regulatory challenge.

One of my guiltiest of pleasures is telling anyone trapped with me in a confined space for more than thirty seconds that practical fuel economy hasn’t improved in a meaningful way since 2014. While the EPA has raised corporate economy estimates, consumer spending has skewed toward larger and less economical models — invalidating the technological gains made in a vehicular catch-22.

However, some researchers have also begun calling the technologies focused on cutting emissions and saving fuel into question. We already know that lab tests can be gamed through clever engineering. But we don’t drive vehicles on a rolling road and the differences between the lab and the street are immense. Emissions Analytics, an independent company based in the United Kingdom, has tested more than 500 vehicles in the United States since 2013 and believes a change in testing venue can make all the difference.

The firm conducts real-world analyses under normal on-road driving conditions using portable testing gear. Its says its goal is to suss out which trends in the automotive space actually have a meaningful impact on economy — and which are bunk.

As fuel economy figures from the Environmental Protection Agency have been put under the gun for being heavily inaccurate in a few cases, a third-party testing company is offering the public real-world mileage numbers for comparison.